alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Capella, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Brown, J.), rendered December 11, 1981, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel is granted leave to withdraw as counsel *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Niehoff and Fiber, JJ., concur.
#### Henry Harvey et al., Respondents, v Syed Ehtisham, Appellant.

— In a medical malpractice action, defendant Syed Ehtisham appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Scholnick, J.), dated April 9, 1984, which denied his motion for summary judgment.

Order reversed, on the law, with costs, motion for summary judgment granted and action dismissed as against defendant Ehtisham.

In order to defeat a motion for summary judgment, a party is required to lay bare its proof. In the instant case, the record was devoid of any evidence that the defendant doctor saw or attended plaintiff Henry Harvey at any time later than August of 1979. The 21A-year Statute of Limitations applicable to medical malpractice actions (CPLR 214-a) ran in this case, therefore, in February of 1982, and the instant action, which plaintiffs commenced in July of 1982, five months after the statute expired, was untimely. Gibbons, J. P., Weinstein, Fiber and Kooper, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Minera Andes Inc. (the
Corporation), on Form 10-QSB for the three month period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Allen V. Ambrose, President of the Corporation, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |                   |  |                     
|------------------ |  | ----------------- |  | --------------------
|                   |  | MINERA ANDES INC.
|                   |  |                  
|Date: May 14, 2004 |  | By:               |  | /s/ Allen V. Ambrose
|                   |  |                   |  | Allen V. Ambrose    
|                   |  |                   |  | President
S. Con. Res. 28 Agreed to September 21, 2011

One Hundred Twelfth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and eleven 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR EVENT TO AWARD THE 

CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL. 

(a) AUTHORIZATION.—Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor 

Center is authorized to be used for an event on November 2, 

2011, to award the Congressional Gold Medal, collectively, to the 

100th Infantry Battalion, 442nd Regimental Combat Team, and 

the Military Intelligence Service, United States Army, in recognition 

of their dedicated service during World War II. 

(b) PREPARATIONS.—Physical preparations for the conduct of 

the event described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect 

of the Capitol. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives.
Chapman Petroleum Engineering
Ltd.




445,708 -
11th Avenue S.W., Calgary, Alberta T2R 0E4 • Phone: 1403) 266-4141 • Fax. (403)
266-425 • www.chapeng.ob.ca











March 29,
2010






Delta Oil& Gas Inc.


300, 1055
West Hastings St.


Vancouver,
BC


V6E
2E9




Attention:
Mr. Kulwant Sandher




Re:  
Delta Oil & Gas Inc. (the "Company")
 Consent
Letter




As
independent engineering consultants, we hereby consent to the use of our report
entitled "Reserve and Economic Evaluation Oil Property Wordsworth Saskatchewan
Owned by Delta Oil & Gas Inc." dated Jan 21, 2010 and data extracted there
from (and all references to our Firm) included in or made a part of this Form
10­K Annual Report to be filed on or about March 31, 2010.




Chapman
Petroleum Engineering Ltd.




Name: 
Charlie Chapman


Title:   
President






March 29,
2010


[Calgary,
Alberta]




Yours
very truly,




Chapman
Petroleum Engineering Ltd.






/s/ Charlie
Chapman


C. W.
Chapman, Eng.


President




rc15020
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 165 

Designating July 23, 2011, as ‘‘National Day of the American Cowboy’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 5, 2011 

Mr. ENZI (for himself, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. 

CONRAD, Mr. HATCH, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. JOHNSON of South 

Dakota, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. REID, Mr. RISCH, Mr. ROBERTS, and Mr. 

HOEVEN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

JUNE 30, 2011 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating July 23, 2011, as ‘‘National Day of the 

American Cowboy’’. 

Whereas pioneering men and women, recognized as ‘‘cowboys’’, helped establish the American West; 

Whereas the cowboy embodies honesty, integrity, courage, 

compassion, respect, a strong work ethic, and patriotism; 

Whereas the cowboy spirit exemplifies strength of character, 

sound family values, and good common sense; 

Whereas the cowboy archetype transcends ethnicity, gender, 

geographic boundaries, and political affiliations; 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 165 ATS 

Whereas the cowboy is an excellent steward of the land and 

its creatures, who lives off the land and works to protect 

and enhance the environment; 

Whereas cowboy traditions have been a part of the culture of 

the United States for generations; 

Whereas the cowboy continues to be an important part of the 

economy through the work of many thousands of ranchers across the Nation who contribute to the economic 

well-being of every State; 

Whereas millions of fans watch professional and working 

ranch rodeo events annually, and rodeo is one of the 

most-watched sports in the Nation; 

Whereas membership and participation in rodeo and other organizations that promote and encompass the livelihood of 

cowboys span every generation and transcend race and 

gender; 

Whereas the cowboy is a central figure in literature, film, and 

music and occupies a central place in the public imagination; 

Whereas the cowboy is an icon in the United States; and 

Whereas the ongoing contributions made by cowboys and 

cowgirls to their communities should be recognized and 

encouraged: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates July 23, 2011, as ‘‘National Day 

3 of the American Cowboy’’; and 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

SRES 165 ATS 

1 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

2 to observe the day with appropriate ceremonies and 

3 activities. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Second Amendment to the Amended & Restated Employment Agreement




 Exhibit 10.11 
 SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of the 24th day of February 2009 (the “Effective Date”), by and between
Spectrum Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) and John A. Heil (the “Executive”). 
 WHEREAS, the Company and
the Executive previously entered into that certain Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated January 16, 2007 (the “Agreement”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive wish to amend certain provisions of the Agreement in recognition of the Executive’s past services to the Company and the importance to the future success
of the Company of the Executive’s continued services; and 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and
mutual agreements contained herein (promises that include benefits to which the Executive would not otherwise be entitled), and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the
Executive hereby agree as follows: 
 1. Capitalized Terms not defined herein shall have the meanings given those terms in the Agreement.

 2. As of the Effective Date, Executive’s Base Salary was Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) per annum (the “Existing Base
Salary Amount”). For the period from March 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009 (the “Temporary Reduction Period”), Executive’s Base Salary shall be Four Hundred and Seventy-Five Thousand, Fifty Dollars ($475,000) per
annum. As of January 1, 2010, Executive’s Base Salary shall return to the Existing Base Salary Amount. Notwithstanding this temporary reduction in Base Salary, for purposes of calculating any Bonus or other incentive plan amounts or any
other benefit specified in the Employment Agreement or any other agreement between the Company and the Executive, including, without limitation, any severance benefits included therein, earned during the Temporary Reduction Period the Existing Base
Salary Amount shall be used as the Base Salary. 
 3. Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement remains in full force and effect, and
the execution of this Amendment shall not affect the rights of the Company or the Executive under the terms of the Agreement as in effect immediately prior to the Effective Date with respect to events occurring before the Effective Date. 

[Signature Page Follows] 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first
above written. 
  

			
	SPECTRUM BRANDS, INC
	
	 /s/ Kent J. Hussey

	 By:
	 	Kent J. Hussey, Chief Executive Officer


  

			
	EXECUTIVE:
	
	 /s/ John A. Heil

	 Name:
	 	John A. Heil
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Ex parte Simon Martinez Martinez

No. 06

- 23

- 00208

- CR Appeal from the County Court of Kinney County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 10388CR ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice

Rambin

, C hief Justice Stevens and Justice

van Cleef participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find reversible error in the judgment of

the court below. Therefore, we reverse the tria l court ’ s order denying Martinez ’s r equested relief

on his app licati on for a writ of h abe as corpus a nd remand the cau s e f or further proceedings

consistent with th e precede nt of the Fourt h Court of Appeals

. We note that the appellant, Simon Martinez Martinez , has adequately indicated his

inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED DECEMBER 1, 2023
BY ORDER OF THE COURT
SCOTT E. STEVENS
CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey , Clerk
Subscription Form



 Exhibit 10.11 
 SUBSCRIPTION FORM 
 To: FIRST COMMUNITY BANK CORPORATION OF
AMERICA 
 The undersigned hereby irrevocably subscribes for and agrees to purchase
                     units (the “Units”) of First Community Bank Corporation of America, a Florida corporation (the
“Company”) at a price per Unit of $33.33 for an aggregate purchase price of $        . Please submit this Subscription Form (with a check for the aggregate purchase price made out to First
Community Bank of America) to Kay McAleer, Vice President/Corporate Secretary at 9001 Belcher Road, Pinellas Park, FL 33782. 
 The subscription for Units will be effective upon its acceptance by the Company. The undersigned acknowledges that the offering of Units contemplated hereby (the “Offering”) is not subject to any minimum aggregate subscription
level. 
 The undersigned acknowledges and agrees that this Subscription Form, the payment for Units, and any other documents
delivered in connection herewith will be held on behalf of the Company. In the event that this Subscription Form is not accepted by the Company for whatever reason, which the Company expressly reserves the right to do, within 30 days of the delivery
of this form by the undersigned, such payment (without interest thereon) and any other documents delivered herewith will be returned to the undersigned at the address of the undersigned as set forth in this Subscription Form. 
 Please provide the following information: 
  

					
	 Name and Address
	  	 Number of Units
	  	 Aggregate Purchase Price for Units

			
	                                       
     	  	                                       
     	  	$        
			
	                                      
      	  		  	
			
	                                       
     	  		  	
			
	E-mail:
                               	  		  	
			
	 Facsimile: (        )
      -        	  		  	

 If different from the information provided above, please provide the exact name that
the securities underlying the Units are to be registered in: 
  

			
	 Registered Holder Name and
Address

	
	                                       
                                         
                                         
                       
	
	                                       
                                         
                                         
                       
		
	    E-mail:
                               	  	Facsimile: (        )       -            

  

 1 








 The undersigned, duly authorized and acting on behalf of the subscriber named above,
intending to be legally bound, hereby confirms the accuracy and completeness of the foregoing. This Subscription Form may be executed by facsimile in one or more counterparts. 
  

			
	Name of Subscriber:                                 
                                        




					
			
	By:	 	  
	 	
	Name:	 		 	
	Title:	 		 	


 The Company hereby accepts this Subscription Form and agrees to sell the Units
to the Subscriber named above. 
  

			
	FIRST COMMUNITY BANK CORPORATION OF AMERICA
		
	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	
	Title:	 	


  

 2
# C_2019288EN.01006301.xml

| 26.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/63

---

Action brought on 28 June 2019 — Di Lello Finuoli v Parliament

(Case T-410/19)

(2019/C 288/77)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Giuseppe Di Lello Finuoli (Palermo, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;

| — | order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;

| — | order the European Parliament to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.

---
#### Carl J. Anthony, Appellant, v Luana Anthony, Respondent.

In a matrimonial action, plaintiff husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Geiler, J.), dated July 24, 1984, which denied his motion for reargument of his prior motion to compel defendant and the parties’ son to submit to a blood grouping test.

Appeal dismissed, with costs.

No appeal lies from an order denying reargument. Special Term properly determined that the motion before it was one for reargument. The affidavits of plaintiff and his parents submitted in support of the application contained no new evidentiary facts which were unavailable at the time of the original application *(see, Frank v Gessel,*108 AD2d 896; *Foley v Roche,*68 AD2d 558). Thus, no appeal lies from the denial of the motion. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
# C_2020313EN.01002701.xml

| 21.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Essential Export v EUIPO — Shenzhen Liouyi International Trading (TOTU)

(Case T-633/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for a figurative EU trade mark allegedly containing the word element ‘TOTU’ and coloured red and black - Earlier EU trade marks TOTTO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 313/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Essential Export SA (San José, Costa Rica) (represented by: A.B. Padial Martínez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Shenzhen Liouyi International Trading Co. Ltd (Shenzhen, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2019 (Case R 362/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Essential Export and Shenzhen Liouyi International Trading.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Essential Export SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Essential Export SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.

---
# C_2020348EN.01001502.xml

| 19.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 348/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 348/15

---

Order of the General Court of 14 July 2020 — Shindler and Others v Commission

(Case T-627/19) (1)

(Actions for failure to act and for annulment - Area of freedom, security and justice - Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union - Applications for the adoption of a decision maintaining the European citizenship of certain UK nationals and of a decision on various measures relating to the rights of UK nationals - Adoption of a position by the Commission - No invitation to act - Refusal to adopt a decision maintaining the European citizenship of certain UK nationals - No interest in bringing proceedings - Action manifestly inadmissible)

(2020/C 348/22)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Harry Shindler (Porto d’Ascoli, Italy) and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher, C. Giolito and E. Montaguti, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application (i) under Article 265 TFEU seeking a declaration that the Commission unlawfully refrained from adopting, on the one hand, a decision maintaining, as from the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, the European citizenship of certain UK nationals who did not, at that time, have the nationality of an EU Member State, irrespective of whether or not an agreement setting out the arrangements of that withdrawal was concluded, and, on the other hand, a decision on various measures relating to the rights of those nationals, should such withdrawal take place without such an agreement having been concluded and (ii) seeking annulment, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, of the letter of the Commission of 11 September 2019 refusing to adopt a decision maintaining the European citizenship of those nationals.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Harry Shindler and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex shall pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Harry Shindler and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex shall pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.

| 3. | The Council of the European Union shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Council of the European Union shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.

---
#### Rudy DIAZ-RUANO, Petitioner, v. EriC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 09-73713.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 15, 2011.*

Filed June 29, 2011.

*416Rudy Diaz-Ruano, Fontana, CA, pro se.

Matt Crapo, OIL, Michelle Gorden Lat-our, Esquire, Assistant Director, DOJ— U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

MEMORANDUM **

Rudy Diaz-Ruano, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *De Martinez v. Ashcroft,*374 F.3d 759, 761 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Diaz-Ruano has waived any challenge to the BIA’s dispositive determination that he failed to establish prejudice because his failure to depart within his voluntary departure period rendered him ineligible for cancellation of removal. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived); *see also*8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d) (2004).

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its authority to reopen proceedings sua sponte. *See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder,*633 F.3d 818, 824 (9th Cir.2011).

In light of this disposition, we need not address Diaz-Ruano’s remaining contentions.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).